Exclusive: Pentagon accuses Europe of ‘deliberately prolonging’ Ukraine war
Posted by 1DarkStarryNight@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 341 comments
Sircamembert@reddit
What's the point of taking a shit deal now that fatally weakens Ukraine, leaving it vulnerable to another Russian invasion 5 years down the road?
They are right about one thing though- Europe needs to step up further and do more to damage the Russian war machine.
greebdork@reddit
What's the alternative for Ukraine?
Without the pipedreams and wishful thinking, like NATO or EU sending troops, like, as of now, in this exact situation. What is the alternative?
Ukraine doesn't have it in it to fight even another 3 years like this. EU and US can supply them with however many weapons they want, but they can't supply Ukraine with manpower.
DivideMind@reddit
They can. They just won't.
Britstuckinamerica@reddit
Besides terminally online keyboard warriors, you will be incredibly hard-pressed to find any serious EU military who wants to send troops to die for Ukraine (let alone the troops wanting that themselves). The EU is not fighting the war at all; despite all the political conjecture it's categorically not been an attack on them. Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely a debate to be had on what a Ukrainian defeat means for geopolitics, but virtually no one wants to leave their safe country to defend one that is in an extremely poor military position AND isn't even close to being part of the European Union
DivideMind@reddit
I am aware and I dislike it. I grew up around the consequences of poor vigilance (the last two generations of my family barely exist: they were killed.) it seems we only ever act when it's too late. Why deal with the consequences now when you can have even worse unavoidable consequences later?
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Why does it sound like you wouldn’t want to fight despite the story you just gave us?
DivideMind@reddit
Why are you assuming so? I probably would have joined the armed forces but I didn't have a country most of my life so it was impossible, but I ent up with a lot of friends in the armed forces somehow so I still know what's at stake. I'm probably better working for a military contractor as an engineer anyways given I have the ability and half the training + industrial experience... and multiple sclerosis apparently, so field work is impossible for me now anyways. Plus I love working on avionics.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
Because you are here with a keyboard and not in Ukraine with a rifle.
DivideMind@reddit
I have a disease of the central nervous system, I can't even hold a rifle.
ThatHeckinFox@reddit
Why is it that the loudest warhawks are always people who can't serve...
DivideMind@reddit
Seems like a generalisation but I will bite. Maybe because the disabled are the second casualty of war so we have to face the reality. Who do you think is left behind when cities start falling? Who can't defend their possessions when society falls apart? We have to take the threat seriously because we can't just live in the woods for years like an able person.
But I also thought similarly before I was disabled too so who knows, and I very much wanted to join up. I literally couldn't because I was a citizen of nowhere, so I ended up looking for skills useful to my nation instead.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
Alright Captain Bonespurs..
No one cared? If you want to see what “not caring” looks like, you only need to to look at the last time a European country was attacked in a war of aggression to be cut it into pieces, aka be “balkanized”.
If you think those are the standards the UAF is applying to its newest conscripts and recruits then you must have not followed this conflict very much, making your “voice” on the topic a rather uninformed one.
Case in point:
Writes the dude who wants others to fight and die for him, because he’s too sickly to do it himself, only to then declare this:
When was that period supposed to be, when Russia couldn’t defend itself, but the West had the bomb?
And do you really think that didn’t happen because the West is so “non jingoistic” or did it rather not happen because Russia built its very own nuclear deterrence? Which is in effect to this day.
Not like there’s precedent for the West trying to enforce its “non jingoism” on the Russian people when Russia was divided and weakened by WW1.
Southern-Chain-6485@reddit
Nothing stops you from going to work in Ukraine in a missile or drone factory. That factory could, of course, be targetted by Russian cruise missiles, but hey, you can risk life and limb if you're so certain that more and more people should risk those for Ukraine
DivideMind@reddit
Multiple sclerosis does stop me, actually. I wanted to do what you're suggesting right now.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
I am sorry for your disease. And I get your enthusiasm. The problem is just that you are making decisions and implicitly advocate that other people have to offer their lives, which I think is wrong.
We don’t do that in democratic societies.
Zeydon@reddit
Fascists are taken seriously. The problem is that wealthy elites seriously see them as good for business.
Ironically, Putin is technically fighting against many fascists as well - specifically, those Ukrainians who hail Stepan Bandera as a hero would fit the bill, like the members of Azov battalion. It may not be specifically because of an ideological aversion to fascism on Putin's behalf, but moreso just that Ukrainian fascists (who America had been covertly supporting since the 1950's, see Operation Aerodynamic) have enjoyed much greater status since the regime change that took place in 2014, arguably because of a false flag attack carried out by Ukrainian fascists.
I say all this not to suggest that you shouldn't take Putin seriously, you seem to have that covered, but if you are concerned about fascists not being taken seriously, then perhaps looking more critically at the fascists we're supposed to be granting the most charitably too because aligning with them is currently seen as being in the interests of Western leaders may be a good idea.
MechaAristotle@reddit
Thanks for putting it so clearly and with a personal experience, it's what I often finds talks about Ukraine and the war obscure in some users here's rush to say how fast they're losing or to defend Russia: that we've seen in history what this kind of thing leads too. For my own personal example there is Finlandization.
greebdork@reddit
Tomato, tomato. Doesn't change the results. Ukraine is not getting anything but shipments of weapons and intel anytime soon. I'd argue that Javelins, Storm Shadows, Leopards and Patriots are pretty high end as far as the weapons exports go, but that too is beside the point.
You can lament that fact but what can Ukraine actually do now if they don't agree to Russian terms?
DivideMind@reddit
Do you have a point?
greebdork@reddit
I was asking if people who are strongly against Ukraine taking any deal that doesn't involve Russia backing the fuck off to the 1991 borders, (which is not happening btw, not now, not ever), have any realistic alternatives for Ukraine.
It seems they do not. It seems the alternative is for Russia to continue grinding Ukraine down until the inevitable collapse of the latter, while EU uses the time to build up their own defenses.
CheckMateFluff@reddit
Russia boxed itself in, and its only hope is a Trump bailout. Europe has learned this lesson the hard way; they know the push would not stop at Ukraine, and the cheapest fight is the one you win early. On balance, my money is on Russia losing. A weakened, hollowed-out military invites opportunists, and sooner or later, someone will move to lock in that weakness so it never climbs back to its old weight.
Russia needs the war to end soon, more than Ukraine; every day is a ticking clock.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Recent Western polling has Russians showing record satisfaction and happiness in life and positive outlook in government.
Russia doesn’t need the war to end.
You need the war to end.
And you need it to end in some resounding Russian defeat.
Chroma_primus@reddit
Polling in russia is so good because everyone qho disagress with Putin's war, gets carted of to a Pedal colony in siberia.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Which is still better than Ukraine, where they carry you to the frontline
Chroma_primus@reddit
In russia thy do the same what do you think how they get all the soldiers to replace the losses.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
They don’t do that. Russia doesn’t have a draft.
Russia has open borders.
In fact, Ukrainians try to flee to Russia because they can then immediately fly to Europe and apply for refugee status.
Chroma_primus@reddit
Russia has to Drahtseil one in Fall one in Spring.
Most ukrainians fleed into europe because the EU has Real free movment and fleeing into the frontlines of the war seems very impractical.
CheckMateFluff@reddit
The fact you feel this defensive when I'm just calling of the pieces on the board shows what I say has merit.
MechaAristotle@reddit
I think there has to be negations but people who insist Ukraine take any deal often seem unwilling to say in clear terms why Russia started the war or what they want, it's all about the situation and not the ideology behind it.
greebdork@reddit
Are you asking me why Russian government has started the war and what does it want? I don't know, but i have some guesses.
It's not a single factor though, no clear cut answer as some like to imagine because it's easier that way. It's a combination of Putin's personal ambitions, war providing him with support as people tend to unite under duress, as well as the ability to opress those unwilling to unite behind him and control the inner narrative by shutting the rest of the world off, because it's way easier in the war times, also the lands, resources and factories captured were divvied up by his fat stacks friends long before '22.
What does it want? I imagine the demands stated are exactly that.
But the ideology doesn't mean shit, so there's that. Situation does.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Yes well among a certain group of NAFOids, you cannot criticize Ukraine for anything. This includes strategy and the terrible decisions they made on the battlefield.
So they claim that the reason Ukraine is not performing as well as they want is because they don’t have “enough weapons” or the “weapons aren’t good enough”.
That really just shows a total lack of imagination on their part because they think war is just this simple mathematical equation between two sides, the one with more high tech weapons wins.
For example, Ukraine seriously lacks AirPower yet the way they use AirPower is pretty straightforward; extremely low altitude rocket or missile runs sprinkled with some guided bombs.
You don’t need a F-16 to do that. A-29 Super Tucano can handle rocket runs at a fraction of the price. Upkeep would be much cheaper. It is STOL so you can launch it from highways so the Russians can’t blowup their airfields.
But for whatever reason, Ukraine thinks they need to have a 100 F-16 fleet.
Southern-Chain-6485@reddit
An A-29 Super Tucano has a big, shiny, reflective propeller at the front which would make a nice target for Russian BVR missiles.
If you want to do CAS, you first need to achieve air superiority and for that 100 F-16s aren't enough - Ukraine would need 100 F-35s
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Dude managing overwhelming air superiority against enemies that can’t fight back isn’t an air doctrine.
America does not have any air doctrines because all of them require “air superiority”, which is a vague term that basically means the enemy can’t fight back.
So against any enemy that can fight back, they have no strategy.
If you aren’t willing to use something because they could be shot down, then you won’t use anything.
usesidedoor@reddit
What's the alternative Putin is offering?
Security guarantees with a Russian veto? lol
Ukraine to give up their fortified positions in the Donbas so that Russia can regroup and attack again - this time without so much of a hassle?
historicusXIII@reddit
The choice is between giving up those fortified positions now, or waiting until Russia conquers them, with many ten thousands extra deaths on both sides.
Why would Russia attack again if they got what they wanted? They didn't attack Georgia again either after the peace deal.
ThatHeckinFox@reddit
Those death would eventually come anyway. I doubt Russia would be merciful and just rulers of Ukraine.
greebdork@reddit
We've already established that Russian proposition is bad, though as the dynamic goes it's actually favouring Ukraine way more then Russia, it's Ukraine who loses ground week by week, it's Ukraine who needs to regroup and build defenses which peace or ceasefire would allow them to do, did everyone suddenly forgot how adamant Zelensky wad about ceasefire before any peace talks can even be considered?
I ask you again, what are the realistic alternatives for Ukraine if they ditch the Russian proposition?
usesidedoor@reddit
The status quo is certainly preferable than the current Russian proposition, that's why Ukraine is sticking to it.
Russia's gains in 2025 have been slow and marginal. It's much easier for Ukraine to hold the line as it is right now that give up on their fortified positions and be attacked later on under completely different circumstances.
Ukraine is hurting, but it is not like Russia is having a walk in the park, precisely. Attrition goes both ways.
historicusXIII@reddit
The status quo isn't in fact a status quo but Ukraine losing in slow motion.
greebdork@reddit
It is not the status quo, though. Hasn't been since the end of the counteroffensive. Here's Russian vs Ukrainian gains in sq km by the week since 2023, red is Russia, blue is Ukraine, dotted line is the balance between the two.
https://www.datawrapper(dot)de/_/QgF5L/
usesidedoor@reddit
I understand that claiming that these advances are noteworthy creates a sense of urgency with a view to having Ukraine accept the most terrible of deals - but no, the current state of affairs is preferable to what Putin and friends have in mind. Again, these gains are slow and marginal.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Its not about land gains as this is a war of attrition, and the reality is Ukraine started in a weaker position and isn't doing enough damage to make up for its drastically smaller population. It going on the attack in a major way into Kursk and giving Russia the benefit of being on the defense didn't help.
Ukraine is going to suffer a total collapse and unconditionally surrender unless Russia's economy can be made to collapse first. This can't be done unless either China or India cut ties with it. This doesn't look like its going to happen (we somehow farked this one up so bad that India is making amends with China)
The only other option is direct military intervention which NATO has already shown it won't do.
The status quo may be preferable, but the status quo isn't sustainable. Ukraine is using press gangs, Russia is still using volunteers. Without a change to the status quo Ukraine is going to fully collapse in the next year or two.
Maybe there is some magic third way to crush Russia, but it hasn't shown itself yet.
usesidedoor@reddit
Don't sell this as a fact - frame it as a personal opinion, which is what it is.
Many have been arguing, over the past three years, that the Russian economy was about to 'collapse.'
It's the same with Ukraine. There is no clear indication that Ukraine will collapse within the next two years. Ukraine has a smaller population, but it is also much more effective in the battlefield.
If anything, this 'Ukraine will collapse soon' is a point that has become much more popular on the internet as of late, pushed mostly by Russia-friendly accounts, to get people to become more comfortable with the idea that their terrible peace offering is the best Ukraine can get.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
My brother in Christ, the reason Russia's advances have been increasing despite their dogshit tactics and equipment is because they are starting to just walk through gaps in the Ukrainian lines.
In trenches that should have a few hundred people to man a couple KMs , Ukraine has been relying on 3 man teams and as many drones as they can pack together. But Russia has managed to achieve Drone superiority on top of their massive manpower advantage.
How great your weapons and tactics are doesn't matter if you don't have people to actually hold the line. The source of this isn't Russian propaganda either, its the UAF forces themselves. Do you know how dire the situation has to be that a nation in war time is forced to publicly admit that their enemy is able to just WALK past them?
usesidedoor@reddit
When in doubt, always worth reading the latest reports by the ISW
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-conflict-updates
SamuelClemmens@reddit
If you think territorial gain matters beyond a gauge of if it can be halted you are missing the point of trench warfare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attrition_warfare
If you want to know why this is bad logic, here is some axis propaganda of allied advances.
https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/vjdxvx/german_poster_mocking_american_progress_on_the/
The point isn't that Russia is advancing, its that they are advancing by walking through gaps in the Ukrainian lines.
usesidedoor@reddit
It's just the highlights, read the whole report.
I really, really don't think the situation is critical. I will be around, send me a message in a few months.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Well, that is your opinion. The idea that it is critical is from the Ukrainian Armed Forces though, so seems like they might be on the ball about this issue.
But if Ukraine collapses in the next year two we will know. If Russia's economy collapses instead we will know as well.
usesidedoor@reddit
The data on advances are out there. Prognoses are essentially opinions - so yes, it is my opinion, just like yours.
If any of these countries end up collapsing we will know - that would certainly be hard to miss.
Hyndis@reddit
Wars of attrition are about soldiers and resources, not territory.
In a war of attrition both sides will grind each other down. Eventually one side runs out of men or materiel and the depleted army rapidly and totally collapses.
We're already seeing possible hints of this with Ukraine reaching the point of collapses around Pokrovosk, where Russian troops are able to walk by empty Ukrainian trenches because Ukraine doesn't have enough soldiers to man them.
The risk isn't losing a few miles of territory. The risk is complete collapse of the army, and once that occurs it can happen over a matter of weeks, possibly even days. Its shockingly fast. Most recently this happened in Syria where Assad's army hit its limit, and a week later his government was gone and he had fled the country.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
So you are just waiting for a Russian breakthrough to do anything?
usesidedoor@reddit
Ideally we would be giving Ukraine more of what it needs to defend itself, but I don't get to make these decisions.
greebdork@reddit
The levels of delusion on display are palpable. Cheers.
usesidedoor@reddit
Yes, great argument, thank you for your valuable insights.
Southern-Chain-6485@reddit
Fortifications can be built during peacetime
usesidedoor@reddit
It makes zero sense to give up on more land and on extremely useful positions in exchange for some laughable "peace proposal" from an invading nation that keeps breaking every agreement they signed. Zero.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
What alternatives did Bush offer Afghanistan or Iraq, even when they were willing to negotiate? More bombs and nuclear threats that was the alternative Americans “offered” back then.
Compared to that Ukraine could get a rather decent deal.
PaddyMakNestor@reddit
The lines in this war have been fairly stable for 3 years now, the running out of manpower line is just wishful thinking from the Kremlin. There is no reason to believe Ukraine cannot keep this going another 3 years.
The Russian economy on the other hand is in all kinds of trouble at the moment. The Russian central bank just revealed they are in a technical recession, these are the state figures, we can only imagine how bad the real figures are if they are admitting this. Inflation is double digit and no signs of dropping despite punitive 20% interest rates. Low oil prices combined with Ukrainian attacks on oil fields mean Russia won't come close to balancing the budget this year. Russian businesses are defaulting on loans at an increasing pace.
The Russian economy definitely doesn't have 3 years left. Ukraine is fighting for their homeland, at least they have that for motivation, Russians will not fight when rubles are worth less than toilet paper.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Russia's economy has a debt to GDP ration of \~20%
France by comparison is \~110% with an EU average of \~80%.
Russia is a resource export economy that has a giant border with the world's factory, who is a geopolitical rival of NATO and America and has already said they won't let Russia be defeated.
Russia's economy is going to be fine indefinitely unless we can cut them free from China (or at least India)
PaddyMakNestor@reddit
I don't understand your point here, you have used one point of economic information to present no point from what I can see?
USA and China both have far greater debt to GDP ratios, why not mention them? It's a weird metric to use especially considering Russia has been trying and failing to sell bonds since the war began because the market is sure they will default. You also fail to mention the Russian domestic credit situation where credit defaults are increasing and expected to increase for the foreseeable future according to the Russian central bank that is very likely to lead to a liquidity crisis in the short term. Russia is a sneeze away from catastrophe which is why they are pushing for a deal with Trump.
In terms of China supporting Russia, we are already in a situation where Russia could now be said to be an entirely dependent vassal state of China's. This is a situation Russia desperately does not want, a similar position they claim Europe sits in with the USA. China certainly wants and needs Russia's resources and the Russia that emerges from this war win or lose will not be anywhere near strong enough to resist being subsumed to the Chinese sphere of influence. Russia is done regardless of the outcome of this war, this does not sound "fine" to me.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
There is no metric in which Russia is in any sort of danger of economic collapse. Its economy is still growing and its wartime military expenditures are barely above what Trump wants as NATO peacetime expenditures.
Unless either China or India are convinced to cut off Russia it is fine and will continue to merely grow slower than it would without the war. The status quo is leading to a full Russian victory.
This is not a good thing, it is merely a factual thing. The equation needs to be changed (and I am sure there are probably things going in in the shadows to try to do that).
PaddyMakNestor@reddit
This is not factual though, for one thing Russia's economy is no longer growing, they are in a recession currently. The only reason that their GDP increased since the war began was because Russia had a huge sovereign wealth fund that has been funding the military industrial complex since the war began. They are effectively spending their saved wealth on things that blow up and do not have any good long term effect on the economy as we are seeing now as Russia slides into recession.
You also seem to be unaware of the consumer credit boom in Russia and the preferential loan scheme for the Russian MIC. These loans are at massive interest rates which are leading to unprecedented defaults as companies go under and the loans are not paid back. This is currently causing a liquidity crisis that Russia is seeking to solve by printing money which they have already been doing on a massive scale for 15 years.
As things stand Russia will have a large budget deficit this year. No countries including China and India will lend Russia money so this is a massive problem. Russia isn't releasing the figures necessary to get a true picture of their economy for obvious security reasons so neither of us really knows the full situation. You claim to think Russia is fine but you are also clearly unaware of the economic reality I have stated. Where do you source your news from because it is so myopic it sounds like it comes straight from the Kremlin!
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Yes, a recession. Not a depression. The recession is slow down in growth, but still growth (currently 1.5% in 2025). Nothing you are talking about in regards to Russia is not true of every developed economy. You are describing Russia's economy beginning to sink to the level of rest of the world (in terms of resiliency)
Expert's talk about Putin's "financial fortress" for a reason, he spent 10 years working on it for this exact scenario. Elvira Nabiullina is one of the most important people to Putin's war machine for a reason and is probably the top target of any Ukrainian special forces performing assassinations.
PaddyMakNestor@reddit
Russia is not a developed economy though, they would more accurately be termed an emerging economy who relies on commodity exports. Russia's overreliance on oil exports in particular is one of the reasons that they are currently in trouble. Oil has sharply dropped in value this year and does not seem like rising again any time soon. Russia already reached their defect target in June this year, who knows what it will be by the end of this year. The liquid portion of the sovereign wealth fund will be insufficient to make up the difference in the budget this year. Russia has been forcing their commercial banks to buy government bonds (remember no foreign buyers of Russian debt!) to make up the difference, the banks are already at their limits due to all of the lending and defaulting in the private sector.
This is only the tip of the iceberg, there is far more to it. I will link an article for you to look at if you like that explains it better than I do. Russia is presenting an unconvincing image of financial strength and resilience but in reality they are burning everything and screwing over future generations of Russians for minimal gains. Why is Putin even at war in the first place? Nobody can provide a convincing answer to that question either.
https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2025/why-russias-economic-model-no-longer-delivers
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Yes, and? This is my point. They are screwing future generations. They aren't going to collapse before Ukraine's military forces collapse unless we change the equation with direct conflict or severing Russia from India or China.
PaddyMakNestor@reddit
They can both collapse and screw over future generations, these two things aren't mutually exclusive. I don't know why you believe the Russian economy to be robust when it is a shaky house of cards waiting for a gust of breeze to collapse.
Ukraine's military on the other hand shows no signs of collapse and has held Russia to a stalemate for 3 years at this stage. The Russian armed forces are depleted of equipment and their forces are poorly trained therefore they are incapable of offensive maneuvers. Ukraine has shown no signs of manpower shortage, they have still not conscripted their 18-24 age demographic so until that happens we can chill out on questioning Ukraine's manpower reserves.
Severing China from Russia at this point would be impossible without regime change in Russia, Russia belongs to China now. India for all its size and population is a minor player in this.
SamuelClemmens@reddit
Ok, you are not well informed on this then. Point blank.
The people who list Ukraine as having a critical manpower shortage that is threatening to collapse their front include the UAF and even Zelensky himself. Immense effort is being put in place to try to correct this. They are heavily recruiting from Columbia, are drafting women, and have raised the military age for infantry into the 60s. This is why they have press gangs throwing every able bodied man they can find on the streets into the back of vans to be shipped to the front. Its why trenches that should have a hundred soldiers have a 3 man fire team, which has allowed Russia to start making advances by just walking through unmanned trench defenses and occupy rear line trenches without firing a shot. Sometimes they aren't even noticed until their reinforcements start showing up with supplies. It is that bad.
They aren't drafting the 18-24 range because it is a tiny demographic and if they lose it they lose the country even if they "win". Given their demographic pyramid they will be a non-functional society if that demographic is sent into the meatgrinder. This is also why Russia isn't sending their conscripts into battle (because those are Russia's youth in the same manner). Collapsing birth rates have thrown traditional ideas about conscription on their head.
NotStompy@reddit
Ah yes, discuss something as complex as economics and only bring up one metric, wonderful idea. Next time I'm discussing someone's health with them, I'll bring up how their kidney looks good so they must be healthy, even though they weigh 200 kgs!
SamuelClemmens@reddit
There is no metric by which they are on a path to collapse. Their economy is simple, they are resource extraction and have an irreplaceable portion of the world's supply of raw materials while sharing land border with the world's factory floor.
They are self sufficient with food, fuel, metals, and the basic industrial goods needed for warfare. The war is crippling their possibility for growth, but that doesn't do anything to collapse their war effort. It just puts them in a weaker position in the future.
AnAttemptReason@reddit
Nuclear weapons, Ukraine has sufficient plutonium stockpiles to make a weapon in less than a year.
Give them back the nukes, no more war.
SenorZorros@reddit
The alternative is an Afghanistan situation. The Soviet Afghan war took nine years. The US Afghan war took 20. In the end both could not control a territory as long as the populace resisted. And the Ukrainian resistance is far better organised, bankrolled and equipped.
Personally I'd prefer if russia would just stop prolonging the inevitable but that's not something I can change sadly.
SquirtSommelier@reddit
NATO shouldn’t be a pipedream. I would take freezing the borders as they are right now and giving Donetsk to Russia in exchange for NATO and EU membership for Ukraine.
PressPausePlay@reddit
It seems that currently, what's working well is continuing to target oil infrastructure with targeted attacks within Russia. Far more difficult to defend against, and it keeps a slow trickle against the Russians. They've lost around 20% of their transport capacity within the last month alone. Keep hitting the pipelines, the refineries, etc.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
It isn’t about Ukraine.
It was never about Ukraine for them.
Ukraine was always just the useful idiots. No one cares what they want or what happens to them.
Now, it is just about protecting our ego and making it look like we didn’t lose this war.
It’s the exact same in every single war.
America understood by 1964 that Vietnam was not winnable.
But to admit that would have serious political consequences, not winning re-election.
This is one of the huge downsides of Western style republics, decisions are made with political considerations in mind. So we fought another 5ish years, lost another 50,000 young men KIA, another million Vietnamese KIA, all because some limp dicks in Washington didn’t want to “look weak”
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
So your alternative is to keep fighting, keep incurring losses, Russia advances more and Ukraine has to take an even worse deal in the future just because your ego won’t allow it?
Sircamembert@reddit
The current "peace" proposal has Ukraine ceding their most defensible lines. Unless they are getting ironclad security guarantees, that is a death sentence for them because we all know Putin's words aren't worth the toilet paper it's printed on.
My ego is irrelevant to the strategic situation. Maybe you should check yours.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Of course the logical conclusion is that since Russia might invade in the future, Ukraine should not make any peace at all.
By that logic, every peace treaty in history was a huge mistake — France should still be fighting Germany just in case, the U.S. should be duking it out with Britain, and Japan and the U.S. should probably keep bombing each other forever. Because nothing deters future wars like making sure the current one never ends.
Sircamembert@reddit
Way to twist my words. I said Ukraine shouldn't take the current deal on the table because it fatally weakens them and invites future invasion anyways. If there's a deal on the table that either gives them security guarantees via peacekeepers or let's them keep the Donesk fortress lines, I think they should seriously consider it. The current deal is surrender with extra steps.
If we're doing stupid WW2 metaphors, this is more like giving Hitler the very defensible territory of Sudatenland, hoping he wouldn't invade Czechoslovakia in the future. Spoiler alert: he did.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
What does that even mean? “Invites future invasion”? That is just stupid.
It is a dumb guy’s way of analyzing the world.
It’s been 3.5 years. No one has sent troops.
No one is going to send troops. Because they don’t want to die for Ukraine.
Even Ukrainians don’t want to die for Ukraine.
And then Europeans have the nerve to complain when no one invites them for peace talks. Lol. They isolate themselves.
Sircamembert@reddit
I think the dumb guy's way of looking at the world is assuming Putin is a nice guy who was "forced" to invade a neighboring country just because he dislikes the government. He invaded 3 years ago because he can, and if Ukraine is too weak to fight off another invasion, you can bet your naive ass he'll do it again.
So until they can get a deal that isn't surrendering with extra steps, it's logical to fight on.
No disagreement on Europe. They've been very fragmented and weak on this issue.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
I mean, Taiwan is next on the chopping block.
Same playbook. Pump it full of weapons.
Provoke a war with China.
Have them Duke it out.
We profit.
Sircamembert@reddit
Lol poor China. Being forced to invade and kill thousands of people just like the poor helpless Russians. I get the anti-Western hate, and it's well earned. But it doesn't mean you have to make excuses for murderous tyrants of the East.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Yeah let’s just hope we get a better return on our investment than we did with these pussy ass Ukrainians.
And we better get TSMC too. If we dont, we should blow it up. That company belongs to us anyways
vikarti_anatra@reddit
Exactly why Russia DOESN'T want shit deals. Just make it unnessary for Russia to invade again.
Ukraine will give reasons for another invasion (a lot of people in West will not belive Russian words about those reasons just).
marvin_bender@reddit
5 years? You're optimistic. I think they'll attack again straight away and claim Ukraine broke the ceasefire.
sltn011@reddit
If Putins goal is to break ceasefire and attack again, why would he even agree to said ceasefire, which will stop his army from advancing and allowing UAF to regroup and resupply?
NotStompy@reddit
Well, in all these proposals from Russia you see demands of Ukraine weakening/dismantling their army in some way over time, which I imagine is when they'd want to start the attack back up.
He likely also thinks that if she somehow "Shows" that he's serious about peace, he'll have an easier time not having Trump intervene, cause he's just sick of it at this point.
And then also the domestic situation in Russia, I'd imagine (trying to sell the story of just defending Russian speakers, defending Donbas, etc etc) but you know more about that than me.
So you're right, if nothing changes, if it provides nothing for Putin, he won't stop even for a second, but if he sees any reason to, he'll take it, and do a false flag, as always. I remember literally the days before the 2022 invasion in February suddenly Russia started floating these supposed videos of Ukrainians bombing people in Donbas, one of which even had a guy using prosthetics to make it look like he got his leg blown off... lol. All I know is that as long as there is Putin, there will be false flag attacks. I mean, if the guy is willing to blow up several buildings of his own civilians with planted charges...
mittfh@reddit
Interestingly, there's been some speculation that Russia can't afford to end the war, as doing so would expose the myriad of problems the country has which have been able to be ignored through concentrating on the war (a term they first used last year - I assume by then they'd realised continuing to call it a mere "Special Military Operation" was starting to stretch the limits of credibility).
ferroo0@reddit
what problems are you talking about? Like any post-war country with a lot of PTSD-ridden soldiers, who're struggling to integrate back to the society? or something more broader, like corruption or smth?
because I highly doubt there's some kind of huge underlying issue, that requires war to go on. Russian war machine isn't the same as US' MIC, factories that made drones will change their production line to manufacture civilian goods, and relatively small demographics of Russians actually relied on this war as their main income source. So I don't really understand what issues could there be with stopping war, for domestic Russian reasons?
mittfh@reddit
Health, life expectancy, alcohol abuse, high interest rates, economic output (outside the war machine) not doing greatly, a shortage of young, able bodied men, the costs of maintaining security and rebuilding in captured areas (many countries wouldn't want to reward him by turning off Sanctions)...
Valensre@reddit
Oh their demographics are beyond fucked.
Afghanistan was terrible for the USSR (arguably a factor in its breakup), and they've had far more losses.
ferroo0@reddit
nah, this war is a net-positive for Russian demographics. If Russia will be able to retain it's newly gained territories, then it'll add several million new citizens, while losing, at best, around 200-300k soldiers throughout the entirety of this war.
yeah but Afghanistan was only one little straw. Bigger issues were present for years, and Soviet leaders fucked around a lot. Afghanistan was just a factor that was present during the worst times of USSR, rather then a straw that actually broke the camels back.
Valensre@reddit
Actual copium, most of the population Russia is going to get they already got before the invasion in the heavily pro-ru areas.
Dunno if you saw many pictures of the glorious liberation of Mariupol but it wasn't in much of a livable state. And of the ones that remained young men are a bit of a rare commodity.
As I said, it was a factor.
Ukraine has been a much bigger straw. Like what do you expect to happen afterwards? Sunshine and roses? Ukrainians suddenly becoming enthusiastic members of your 'Eurasian' state?
You'll have a new generation of radicalized Ukrainians growing up that want to kill Russians. History will repeat itself, again and again and again, because you have learned nothing from the past.
ferroo0@reddit
so... what? it's true that a lot of people evacuated into Russia, got various benefits and some of them got free living space, but whats your point? Russia wouldn't have gained them if they never invaded, so they received more people then they lost, thus making it a net-positive? or do you meant that Russians should rise birth rates instead of getting flat amounts of population?
yeah I saw that. There's a lot of stories of Eastern Ukrainian refugees coming to Russia and, to my surprise, actually getting free living space as they were promised to. Cities will be rebuilt, while people keep on living, which is perfectly fine in my book. Eastern Ukrainian territories are bound to attract a lot of investments from Russian / Chinese companies, making them really attractive to live in, in the foreseeable future.
it's true, but it's a straw nonetheless. It's incapable to break Russian' back by itself, and I don't understand the context behind Ukrainians being enthusiastic. Like, no? We're talking about population, and as you said - majority of occupied territories were historically pro-ru, and Russians know that - that's why they lay claims on Eastern Ukrainie only, on the lands of people who have much bigger grudge against Ukrainian government, rather then with Russians.
History may as well repeat itself, if both Ukrainian and Russian administrations in the future will consist of extremists, with anti-RU/UA agendas. Apart from that, I'm betting on Russia and Ukraine normalizing relations in decade or two for the sake of common economical goals (or, worst case scenario, Ukraine getting pro-ru candidate who'll push pro-ru agenda)
Valensre@reddit
They don't just need 'people', they need young working men who are going to enter the workforce. And again, there aren't that many of those. Because of the war..?
Well yeah, that is how imperialists and authoritarians think. It's for the 'greater good', right? Ends justify the means?
Just ignore the mass graveyards and the basements.
Nope, they tried going past that and doing 'referendums' in places in places like Kherson to annex them into Russia. Had the Kyiv offensive been successful and the counteroffensive not successful no doubt we would've seen a lot more.
Had Russia stuck to the separatist provinces and merely defended them we wouldn't be having this conversation. I've always thought that would've potentially been justified.
mittfh@reddit
The areas with the biggest pro-Russian vote in elections roughly corresponded with the areas of the DPR and LPR during the stalemate phase of the conflict, with support tailing off the further from the border you go. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts were partially about creating a land route to Crimea, but also partially Putin's "Novorussiya" idea of all the Southern and Eastern Oblasts (there have been limited incursions into Kharkiv Oblast) being part of Russia (possibly alongside Transnistria, which didn't want the USSR to end; after which Moldova could potentially be a tempting target given it's small, poor and not a member of NATO).
Annexing bits of Ukraine not only increases Russia's population (including by kidnapping and forcibly adopting out Ukrainian children) but also increases pressure on the West for people and families who aren't particularly big fans of Vlad.
Hyndis@reddit
While its true that Russia has lost many lives in the war so far, Russia has gained more people than it has lost. Remember, its already conquered about 20% of Ukraine. People still living there have become Russian through policy changes. New ID cards and passports assigned, they have to use Russian currency. They have effectively become Russian citizens at this point.
The war was always about expanding Russia, both in terms of territory and people. Putin has said this repeatedly, he's not subtle about it. He believes Ukraine is not a real country and Ukrainians are just lost and confused Russians who need to be welcomed back to Russia.
Putin's war goals are not to kill everyone, but to convert both the land and people to be Russian.
Valensre@reddit
In terms of deaths, casualties, and brain drain of young working men leaving the country I disagree.
PressPausePlay@reddit
Correct. I doubt they'd even stop even if they got evrything. Literally, the war would continue hours after signing it. They'd do the same as before. Begin independence movements in border towns and destabilize the rest through propaganda.
Dic3dCarrots@reddit
Comeon now, It'll take a few days for them to surge troups and equipment to the front, Putin won't waste that opportunity.
hshnslsh@reddit
The tactic clearly works in the middle east
thegodfather0504@reddit
I always thought that now that Putin is getting old. He might wanna do something like that to put in their history books.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Yep, russia would probably shoot Ukraine in that back while they were withdrawing.
marvin_bender@reddit
The only way it could work is if it includes say a 6 months ceasefire to allow Ukraine to fortify the new border and retreat. The fact that this isn't being discussed tells me it's not a serious discussion.
Conflictingview@reddit
So Trump can get his Nobel Peace Prize
Sircamembert@reddit
Can we take away Obama's Nobel? Maybe that'll get the man child to calm the fuck down. Besides, Obama didn't really do that much for world peace anyway.
mittfh@reddit
Then one year the EU won the prize of the astonishing achievement of its Member States resisting the temptation to go to war with each other for 60+ years...
... while getting involved in plenty of conflicts outside their borders... 🤦
Maelger@reddit
Well, considering the past several thousand years it is an achievement.
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
Lol, he definitely needs his prize revoked.
smurg112@reddit
The only thing he should get is a Novel Piss Prize
Wholesomebob@reddit
Hahaha because the Swedes are so fond that man
haggerton@reddit
They're losing, homie.
The situation is gonna get worse, not better.
If they don't want a shit deal today, they take a shittier deal tomorrow.
Closing their eyes and chanting "but I don't wanna" won't change that.
Sircamembert@reddit
They're losing land, sure. But they aren't losing in the strategic sense. Their strategy has always been to trade land for Russian blood and treasure. Is this a winning strategy? Who knows? But only a casual observer or dedicated troll would go around announcing their defeat as if it's written in the stars.
The Zelenskyy slander would've worked a lot better if he had fled Kyiv 3 years ago when the Russians poured in. The life of an exiled ex-president is a cushier life than the life of a president of a country badly outmanned and outgunned.
ferroo0@reddit
you're correct in the assumption, that entire Ukrainian strategy was to attrition Russian forces as much as possible, while giving the least amount of land possible. The issue is in the fact, that Russia has much more resources to cope with that fact. Russia burnt it's hand when it tried to do a swift, quick assault on Ukraine back in 2022 (initial invasion). After that, Russians changed their strategy as well - no more gigantic assaults, no more rushing.
thus this war became a war of attrition. All that matters is how quickly you can restore your loses, while dealing as much damage as possible to the other side. Russians have much more firepower, much more efficient way to recruit new troops (thus allowing rotations), and actually advances in this war, scoring victories that fuel domestic propaganda. Ukraine lack all of this - they have a smart strategy that allows them to slow down Russians significantly, but not enough to actually deal significant damage that will halt the advance completely.
that strategy needs to change, because as long as Russians are not rushing like an idiots - time is on their side, alongside manpower and firepower advantages. That's why it's important for Ukraine to either adapt, or cut their losses and accept demands, because nature of this war lies in the fact that more and more people will die, and less people there is to fight for you - the worse demands you'll have to accept.
Sircamembert@reddit
You do have a point. But if the deal now guarantees the end of Ukrainian independence, why take that deal when there's a 5-10% chance they can outlast the Russians. The math as it is now favors continuing the resistance.
ferroo0@reddit
yes, it's a huge gamble that may work out, but only if there's going to be any change in general direction. Standing on one thing isn't going to work out at all, and if things go this way, this 5% chance will gradually get down to 1.5%, to 0.7% to 0.0001%.
attrition rate is too much for Ukraine to handle, and even if Ukraine will receive all the weapons and equipment in the world, this would only supply attrition rates for a while, before manpower shortage will become critical. There needs to be change in both strategy, support and pressure on Russia - all of this needs to be ramped up to 11, and even then - it's still just raises the percentage of attrition to a certain degree.
the issue isn't in the fact that Ukrainians are weak or that Russians are monolithic forces. The issue is in the recourses - and recourses is Russian forte. And I don't see anyone taking a gamble, to sacrifice well being of it's own country just to suffice Ukrainians potential militaristic victory. Ukrainian independence wasn't ever a question, the question (at this point in time) is about Eastern Ukrainian lands, not entire state of Ukraine. It would require additional years of war for potential Russian advance towards the East (because in the same manner as Ukraine is unable to repel Russians, Russians cannot afford to move through the Dniepr river).
that's why I consider best scenario for Ukraine is to cut off their loses in the East, not to sacrifice their safety and ambition in the West, and to pursue economical development first and foremost, with or without those eastern lands.
Sircamembert@reddit
If the Russian deal on the table is freezing the front lines and recognition for all the land they already stole, I'd personally take it. But the fortress belt they have in the Donesk region is too valuable to give up, not when that's the only security guarantee they have now.
haggerton@reddit
You're reading too much propaganda. They are losing in the strategic sense too.
Ukraine is the one kidnapping citizens off its streets to send to the front, Russia isn't.
One of them will exhaust itself and collapse, yes. But that's Ukraine.
He would have had no billions passing through his hands.
He thinks big, unlike you. Soaking his hands in billions is much better than living like a rat for the rest of his life.
Sircamembert@reddit
Lol look at the Zelenskyy expert here. Such in depth psych analysis! Bet you also know what he had for lunch yesterday, right?
Stop talking outta your ass. Your inexplicable hatred of the man has you painting a picture of him inconsistent with reality. He could've taken a page out of ex-president Ghani (of Afghanistan) and fled with millions in cash. Then get a book deal or lecture circuit for millions more. That would've been the easy way out. The fact that he didn't take that path back when nobody knew if Russia will take Kyiv says something about him.
I get it. You're trying to push a pro-Russian narrative, but it's a narrative made of propaganda and personal animus. I hope nobody buys it.
haggerton@reddit
Out of the both of us, you're the one not backing up your statements with anything at all except Western propaganda that's so easy to disprove that you have literally no counterargument.
Stop projecting.
BurstYourBubbles@reddit
I understand why the EU or Ukraine wouldn't like that arragement but why would Russia invade if they've achieved their goals and the war ends under favourable conditions?
thegodfather0504@reddit
For that you need to ask why Russia invaded ukraine at all.
BurstYourBubbles@reddit
Sure, but it wasn't completely arbitary. Russia had political goals in mind when they did that, right? So if their political objectives were acheived why continue?
Sircamembert@reddit
"Why would Hitler invade Poland? He already has the Sudatenland and Austria!"
That's the funny thing about a militaristic dictatorship- they don't stay satisfied for long.
ObjectiveObserver420@reddit
So why haven’t the Russians taken the rest of Georgia after the 2008 war?
NotStompy@reddit
Because Russia is a weaker country in every sense than their geopolitical opponents, which means that Putin has had to pick the right time to play his cards, in his mind. He knows he can't try everything all at once, especially not when taking into consideration the economics where Russia objectively is a drop of water in the bucket. Maybe he saw the 2000s and 2010s as an opportunity to still try to grow economically while still pushing the limits sometimes (Georgia, Ukraine 2014, etc).
I can't tell you what his exact reasons have been year by year, but I can tell you it boils down to him trying to play his cards to the best of his ability, sometimes making the right move, sometimes not. Some objectives of higher importance, some just being stepping stones.
ferroo0@reddit
okay I agree with the sentiment that Putin isn't an idiot who'll bet on some kind of war for the sake of questionable benefits. He's the one who pushed invasion of Ukraine as far as possible, and refused to make a full-scale invasion back in 2014, because he knew that Russian economy has to be reinforced against Western sanctions, but I disagree with Georgia as an example.
Georgia in 2008 was completely different thing, due to the fact that pretty much entirety of world just agreed that Georgia was the one who started this war first. It's all started by Georgians bombing Russian peacekeepers in Abkhazia, thus starting military actions against Russia who didn't do much to provoke this attack. Thankfully war didn't last for too long, and I doubt that Russians actually imagined that Georgia will start attacking them out of the blue.
Ukraine is different, because Ukraine is much bigger threat and much more important for Russia. It took a lot of money, a lot of blood spilled, and Putin (and Russian government in general) won't settle for half measures. Because there's no chance that they'll want to ramp up militaristic expenditures again, there's no chance that the second time will be popular amongst Russians for at least several months too. I highly doubt that Putin will agree to any stops in the way, just to backstab latter - when he can just push and push until he gets what he wants, just not to start another war in the foreseeable future.
War is not profitable for anyone, other then US and it's gigantic MIC. All of this money that Russia pays soldiers can be used elsewhere; all of this sanctions create roadblocks for potential customers in Europe; and all of this budget deficit can be replenished with developing economies in Eastern Ukraine and it's natural riches.
NotStompy@reddit
Yeah, the war is growing unpopular with some at home, but for me as I understand it the bigger concern is simply that of Russia now being in a complete war economy footing, meaning that they can't just simply stop, if they do the economy isn't gonna stumble on for long. I think peace just simply isn't an option for Russia now for several reasons but especially this one. It was some eye watering number like dozens of percentages of the federal budget going to the military. All those people going from other industries to work in the war industry because of better profits, all the young men who've died in Ukraine, etc.
He's mentioned "Being at war with NATO" for several reasons, mostly for domestic political reasons, but I do think he has to keep this whole thing going, from now on.
ferroo0@reddit
nah, federal budget going to the military is the reason why Russians are interested in stopping this war. Russians don't really profit from this war - it's not the same as US and their MIC, that actually brings money, and treats militaristic expenditure as an investments, that will bring profits. Federal budget is just a small part of Russian economy, that defines on what can Government do with said budget. Most often then not, Government needs more money on the things that were initially planned, thus deficit is born.
for example, Russian budget doesn't have much to do with budgets for other sphere - like subsidized mortgage plans, or welfare for disabled and elderly. Basically, Russian economy is structured in the way that Government itself is entirely invested in the war and foreign policy, while other Federal bodies are interested in using other funds to develop the country itself. All of this is done so the economical damage is minimized (trying not to touch on other budgets) so people won't get angry.
if Russia stops this war, there won't be any income sources that are affected (as opposed to US MIC that would lose it's contracts), but rather losses will be patched up. Because largest reason for this budget deficit is Governmental needs to spend a lot of money on volunteers (several million rubbles for each and every single one)
Russians definitely feel fatigued over this war, and were quite hopeful for Trump' presidency, since he made a lot of promises to actually stop this war, in one way or the other. Russians definitely fortified themselves from sanctions and foreign influence, but it's not that great to live in the national bunker, y'know? I think there's all the reasons to finish the war, rather then to prolong it exponentially. End goals don't satisfy the means that were taken to even come to the time, when entirety of Ukraine is conquered, or something.
NotStompy@reddit
I def agree with you on Russia not making profits from the war effort, but that also wasn't what I said, I said more so that the risk is a collapse. Basically:
There have been huge monetary incentives for Russian industries to focus their capacity on war-related ends. This means the civilian ends for which they've been providing in years prior have been neglected, and both capital and talent has flocked to this government incentivized area of war production, let's take industry (production of goods) as an example.
The rate at which they've grown this war-sector is simply not sustainable long term, so what happens when the war ends and these financial incentives that's propping up not just sectors directly involved, but also all supporting ones? Well, contracts go bye bye, workers get laid off. Oh, and that civilian demand that used to exist for these industries but has now shrunk for years? It's not just gonna magically pop back up. There would be a painful period, I think.
So... continue with the war and this unsustainable structure, not great, but it's like a slowly developing poisoning. Try to (more) quickly or even sharply turn off that tap in the event of the war ending? That's less like a slowly developing toxicity, and more like severe radiation poisoning, or the bullet to the cranium one would beg for in such a situation.
So yeah, the war is a huge cost to Russia, but according to many at least, we've kinda gone past the point of no return, and they'd have to keep a forever war going, maybe a less intense one, or keep some other excuse to direct so much of the economy towards war-related industries.
thegodfather0504@reddit
Because those goals are only stepping stones towards the large historical feat that the dictator with delusional of grandeur, seeks to pull. Like putting ukraine back into the glorious empire, or something like that.
Ashenveiled@reddit
Point is that the next deal may be even shittier.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
Or may be not.
Ashenveiled@reddit
you mean Soviet winning battle for moscow?
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
Which was a defensive battle that stopped German advance in one particular piece of the front (politically the most important one of course) while the Germans kept advancing everywhere else.
At this point it was clear that USSR would not capitulate unconditionally, but it still did not mean they could not still lose the war. Except in the religious cult of Victory the Russians (not the Soviets, Russians) turned it into 60 years later.
Likewise Ukraine won the Battle of Kyiv in March-April 2022, it still did not mean they have won the war
Southern-Chain-6485@reddit
The USSR was fighting on a war economy, the Americans started giving them weapons without any restriction in their use, had a larger territory than the Third Reich and outnumbered the Nazis.
Ukraine has a smaller territory, a smaller population, their so-called allies restrict themselves in the weaponry they give them and, most crucially, the EU is not in a war economy mode nor they want to.
They are hoping to stretch the war for another 3 1/2 years, expecting a new American administration to put boots in the ground for them, and without giving a thought of the consequences of a land war in East Europe between the USA and Russia.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
The weapons Americans have been giving to the Soviets were of secondary meaning. The really essential part of Lend-Lease was food, raw materials, chemicals, machinery etc. This has made possible that a vastly larger part of the Soviet population could work in weapons manufacturing or fight than would be possible otherwise. Plus, of course, the bombing etc degrading the manufacturing capacity of the opposite side.
And the Russians love to claim that they were fighting against all of Europe united by Nazis (which is to a certain degree true since the Nazis pressed the industrial capacities of the countries they conquered into the war effort), so the Soviets were supposedly outnumbered.
Lastly, the "waiting for USA to put boots on the ground" is simply a speculation without a basis.
Ashenveiled@reddit
yes, but their 1941 is already going for 3 years and all last attempts at defensive battles failed. and their two offensives failed spectacularly.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
I would say their defensive battles were mostly successful. Grinding down the attackers without losing anything really irreplaceable is the definition of successful defensive battle.
And their first offensive (Kharkiv) was spectacularly successful (and mainly stopped by UA being too wary of overextending themselves), their second one (Kherson) reasonably successful too, the third (Robotyno) failed and the rest is a mostly successful defensive. The area captured by RU from the end of Ukrainian counteroffensives 2023 until today is less than 1% of the Ukrainian territory. Most of the really valuable real estate in Donbas has been already captured by Russia either in the initial surprise attack in the first weeks of the war and what valuable stuff is left, is still held by Ukraine. In the end, even if Russia expends another couple hundred thousand men and captures Kramatorsk and Slavyansk, there won't be much left there after it has been fought over for months.
Which is exactly why I don't understand the Russian obsession with administrative borders.
Ashenveiled@reddit
> I would say their defensive battles were mostly successful.
they lost every single one of them since 2022.
> Grinding down the attackers without losing anything really irreplaceable
they lost elite soldiers in Bakhmut fighting against Wagner.
> Estimates vary from 3:1 to 1:10 depending on who you listen to.
we have proper numbers from Mediazona and BBC - russian losses are not even close to the lies of ukraine. not even close to million of dead/heavily wounded.
> And their first offensive (Kharkiv) was spectacularly successfu
because russia lacked infantry. this window of opportunity ended long ago. at that particular time Russia had less soldiers in ukraine then ukraine did. now its on par or russia has more.
> their second one (Kherson)
they failed on the field but won coz of the destroyed bridge. nothing more. anyway what is the point to discuss 2022 when Russian army (and ukrainian) was a different thing completly? Since 2023 situation on the field goes worse and worse with each month.
> a mostly successful defensive
you mean russia getting more and more territory with record low losses even if we believe UK and Ukraine?
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
>you mean russia getting more and more territory with record low losses even if we believe UK and Ukraine?
The maximum losses were in May 2025 and monthly territory losses declined since then.
At the same time, Russian losses (per Mediazona/UK) pro km² captured territory declined strongly from january to may 2025 and stay constant with light upwards trend since then.
Which corresponds to the change of tactics on the Russian side (no more mass assaults, only infiltration) which reduces losses but also is only successful at the beginning. But it also means Russia is employing less manpower. Which, again, may be due to recruitment problems. Obviously there is not going to be any confirmation. At the same time, obviously, if one side employs the same tactic over sufficient period the other side will adapt to it and develop a method to repulse it. Which is what we observe now.
Sircamembert@reddit
So? They were always going to keep fighting until they could get some sort of security guarantee. So that changes nothing.
Mundane_Emu8921@reddit
Yeah. It’s a test run for Taiwan
Ashenveiled@reddit
till the last ukrainian?
Chroma_primus@reddit
Or till the last russian what ever happens sooner ;-)
Ashenveiled@reddit
ukraine before war: 37 millions
Russia before war: 146 millions.
you guys are delusional
MechaAristotle@reddit
Can you state what those Russians are dying for? What is in it for the common Russian soldier? What is the cause?
Ashenveiled@reddit
cant tell you exactly - im not a soldier and a few ones that i talked with were doing it coz their duty (they were contract soldiers before the war start and are serving in Air Defense Unit in Crimea).
Chroma_primus@reddit
Yep but it's only me thats delusional i'm not representig the west or anything.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
Fritz still raging that he got his Nazi ass handed to him.
Chroma_primus@reddit
I'm a socialist actually my armenia friend.
Hope armenischen starts the accesion process with the eu soon and leaves the russian schwarz of influnce.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
a ‘socialist’ warmonger, lol.
how German of you!
yes I know u would love that, you would love to destroy it like you did Ukraine.
still, might have a harder time there considering they're not as easily brainwashed w/ Russophobia.
Chroma_primus@reddit
I'm not destroying ukraine it's Putins troops that wage a Brutal premidtated invasion bombing civilians and such.
I want a lasting peace not a Foul deal where ukraine becomes another russian vassal and has all their wealth go in the Pocken of russian oligarchs.
I want armenia to join because of the savety the EU can provide them considering Putin left them handling the last time they got invaded.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
I'm obviously not talking about u, personally. the West/EU/Nato did by deliberately interfering and actively trying to pull Ukraine away — to pull Ukrains away from who? its own people. ur dirty tactics enabled a civil war and now cheering for it's prolonging. disgusting.
yes, yes, I'm sure the EU will help, they did so much in 2020 after all (condemnation statements, and diplomatic support, actually the latter was just France/Greece so not even that, lol) compared to Putin (actual involvement + military aid). they've also done so much for Georgia, right? and of course, it's not like the EU is actively cosying up & making deals w/ ARM’s main enemy. lol. u guys are just hilariously out-of-touch.
Chroma_primus@reddit
The West didn't interfer in Ukrainian politics compared to russia who want a "regim change" in ukraine.
It is also not acivil war because russia is a separat country from ukraine someting most russian chills can't comprehend.
Putins Support was just begging Aserbaidschan for a peace treaty because He is preocupide with the ukrainian invasion.
The EU and america managet to negotiat a peace Deal compared to Putins atempt a clear victory.
Yeah we should have supported georgia more when it was invaded by russia.
Ashenveiled@reddit
or they will be in infinite limbo like ukraine since 2014. or turkey since... last century.
Chroma_primus@reddit
Yeah could also Happen to them if they don't progress on the mielstoness Requiem for joining.
chillichampion@reddit
Who’s going to give those security guarantees as Russia is unwilling to accept them?
Monterenbas@reddit
It won’t change anything for Europe, except that more of Putin’s soldiers will die in the process.
Ashenveiled@reddit
you kinda forget more ukrainians, both soldiers and civilians will get killed in the process too.
Monterenbas@reddit
I don’t, but they seems to believe that this a better alternative than being turned into a Russian colony.
At least, they’re dying to defend their country, what are the russians dying for? Grab a little more land? Assure Putin’s legacy as the great conqueror?
Kelak1@reddit
The Russians are dying for what they believe is an existential threat: Ukraine joining NATO.
MechaAristotle@reddit
If you don't think NATO countries are willing to bleed to defend an invaded country, why would they be willing to invade another country will the goal to end it's existence?
Kelak1@reddit
Russia hasn't stated the goal is to end the existence of Ukraine. They've stated the goal over and over again. Each time the Western media just ignores it.
Monterenbas@reddit
Is it an existential threat tho?
Kelak1@reddit
Whether you believe it is existential or not, that's what the Russians believe. They've been pretty clear about this for decades now. It was the stated motivation for the invasion. It's the requirement placed on every peace talk.
chillichampion@reddit
Who’s they? The men who’re kidnapped on the streets to fight or the regime embezzling billions of dollars from the aid?
Ashenveiled@reddit
> but they seems to believe that this a better alternative than being turned into a Russian colony.
who said that? the ones who are partying in europe or in Lviv?
Monterenbas@reddit
The ones who are currently fighting to defend their country.
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
Ah, the fascists/Russian thugs are so concerned about them missing an opportunity? Stop begging Ukraine to give up. They have every right to fight on if they choose to. They are fighting for their independence and country, not greed.
Ashenveiled@reddit
Turkish guy talking about fascism and thugs. How's your sultan doing?
Did those guys shoved into the van daily had any choice tho?
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
Lol take Putin's dick out of your mouth. At least I'm not sucking our wanna be sultan's balls dry.
If you're so worried about those guys, gtfo of Ukraine.
Ashenveiled@reddit
> Lol take Putin's dick out of your mouth and I'll shut up. At least I'm not sucking our wanna be sultan's balls dry.
hows erdogan ass tasting?
> If you're so worried about those guys, gtfo of Ukraine.
im not in ukraine.
Musikcookie@reddit
Sometimes choosing the lesser evil will just mean another step of paving a highway for the evil. And additionally from a very global perspective even when a global power is able to push through imperialist goals, making it very costly to do so is one way to prevent (further) aggression and indeed get a stronger negotiation position. Of course, it's not fair that this happens to the Ukrainians who essentially become sacrifices in making Russias expansion costly. I think Europe really needs to step up and stop being so hesitant and dependent. But since nationalist shits control most of the political landscape that doesn't happen. Thus in a very dumb turn of events, Ukraine is diminished to a "Russia damaging machine" by the tragic constallation of European election results.
It's really hard to admit this because I strongly identify with the EU but at the same time I hate what we elected on all levels of the EU and it certainly is not what I voted for. But that's what it is. The EU is taking the easy but bad path of being a somewhat apathatic, hesitant supporter, Ukraine is taking the difficult but good path of resisting to the bitter end so that Russia can not do whatever they want without being punished for it.
insitnctz@reddit
The point is that Trump gets richer since he is a Russian asset
anders_hansson@reddit
Whether it's Europe pushing Zelensky or if it's the other way around is unclear, but otherwise I doubt that anyone would argue against this. It's literally the outspoken goal since April 2022 to get a better deal, and it's the modus operandi to hold out "for as long as it takes" since the failed 2023 counteroffensive.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
this might have been a viable strategy when crooked Joe Biden was around, but now that Trump is president — and he clearly wants to end it — it's not really.
& when I say viable strategy’ I strictly mean geopolitically — for the select Russophobic states in Europe, certainly not for the nation of Ukraine or its people. the best option for Ukraine would have been agreeing to the 2022 draft deal.
Magpie1979@reddit
Absolutely not. This is an absurd position. the 2022 deal was for Ukraine's surrender.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
That deal was better than today's. And the proposal of tomorrow will be worse than yesterday. And it is your fault.
Magpie1979@reddit
nope to all of that. That deal would be the end of Ukraine, instead Ukraine still stands and looks like it will continue to stand for the foreseeable future.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
It would be a Ukraine. There is no Ukraine left anymore. Congratulations for the victory
Magpie1979@reddit
Wonder what life is like when your that deluded.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
How many billions UK sent to Ukraine? My country is pleading just another. Would my taxes go to Ukraine if they had accepted that deal in 2022? No.
Magpie1979@reddit
Not enough. Ukraine is holding off a facist invasion of Europe. We have sent very little and yet they have decimated the huge Russian Soviet stock piles. Amazing value for money.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
https://www.businessinsider.com/russias-army-15-percent-larger-when-attacked-ukraine-us-general-2024-4?utm_source=reddit.com
It is bigger now
Magpie1979@reddit
Lol, that's number of soldiers. Men are cheap in Russia. They have lost huge amounts of amour they are unable to replace.
It's going fine with me, thanks for asking.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
So, I'm not the one coping here right? And UK is doing fine?
Magpie1979@reddit
Think you might be. UK is also doing fine.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Is it?
Magpie1979@reddit
Yes.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52842-eight-in-ten-britons-say-the-uk-is-in-a-bad-state
Magpie1979@reddit
People alway complain.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Seven out of ten Russians believed their country was moving in the right direction in June 2025
https://www.statista.com/statistics/226223/satisfaction-with-country-direction-in-russia/
Magpie1979@reddit
Russian polls are hilarious.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_Russia-related_deaths_since_2022
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
It wasn't made by a russian agency
Magpie1979@reddit
Doesn't matter, Russian don't trust polls for good reason. You actually know any Russians?
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Again, it wasn't made by a Russian agency.
Magpie1979@reddit
Then you should know that it doesn't matter who did the poll.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
So two polls saying the same are wrong? What about three? Should I like the Kiev Post from last year as well?
Magpie1979@reddit
You can link as many as you want. Doesn't change the fundamentals, opinion polls taken in a police state can't be trusted.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
But one of them are taken... By you:
In 2022 an London School of Economicw said "The most reputable public opinion data available in Russia are from the Levada Center, a non-governmental research organisation conducting regular surveys since 1988."
Magpie1979@reddit
Indeed. But even they have their limits and should be treated with skepticism.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Why send money to them then?
Magpie1979@reddit
I don't
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
You know what taxes are?
Magpie1979@reddit
I do. I don't believe they receive funding from the UK government. They state they receive no funding from abroad at all.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
It is literally considered a foreigner funded agency by Russia
Magpie1979@reddit
An agancy that sometimes says things Russia doesn't like is labelled a foreign agent by Russia... I'm shocked I tell you.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
So, an agency censured by the government of Russia because of foreign funding, also from UK, is revealing that the Russians are actually satisfied by their government...
How you are bending this?
Magpie1979@reddit
I don't believe you are arguing in good faith. I refuse to believe people are this dumb...
An agancy not funded by the UK. A polling agancy at that, in a country where people are deeply skeptical of polling agencies and especially speaking out against their government, might not produce the most reliable polls when I comes to the satisfaction of said government.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
It was considered a foreigner agency by being funded by UK.
And again, LSE pledged that the agency is the only one transparent in Russia.
Yet, the polls are in.
Wanna good faith? Stop negating reality
Magpie1979@reddit
In 2013. That was 12 years ago.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
The LSE statement was in 2022
Magpie1979@reddit
Uk funding wasn't
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Again, the LSE statement was in 2022. And as you said, it was an entity funded by UK
Magpie1979@reddit
This has to one of the stupidest arguments I've had on Reddit, testing my tollerence for idioticy to be honest.
You were claiming I was funding the Levada Centre with my tax money. An organisation that hasn't received money from abroad for 12 years.
_Kiith_Naabal_@reddit
Again, the LSE statement was in 2022. And as you said, it was an entity funded by UK.
Wanna good faith? Stop denying reality
Magpie1979@reddit
Ha ha ha, yeah I'm out.
alecsgz@reddit
I mean
The guy you are talking to says things like "crooked Joe Biden was around" and "select Russophobic states in Europe,"
You are mots likely talking to a Russian or Russian adjacent patriot that lives in Scotland. Never going back to Russia or whatever though
Potaeto_Object@reddit
Well then I guess that means the current Russian terms are for Ukraine’s super duper surrender.
Magpie1979@reddit
Pretty much. They have been absolutist from the the start. They want an end to Ukrainian sovereignty and it's ability to defend itself. They haven't changed their core demands from the start.
anders_hansson@reddit
This has been parroted ad nauseam in western media. Please do not use that word as it's simply misinformation. A "surrender" can be interpreted as many things, but most people would see it as a total concession of all of Ukraine to Russia, or something similar. That's not what the draft treaty was.
Another common misconception is that there was a take-it-or-leave-it deal in April 2022. No. The negotiations were ongoing.
The obvious diplomatic solution in April 2022 would have been for Ukraine's western allies to support the peace talks and offer their security guarantees to Ukraine (without NATO membership), and threaten Russia that if they did not agree to proper arrangements (no Russian veto), then NATO would make the war very costly for Russia. That opportunity was missed.
Instead we neither supported the negotiations nor the security guarantees:
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
One of the Russian demands in the 2022 deal was that Russia gets full control over Ukrainian armed forces hardware. I.e. Tanks and howitzers being stored in a warehouse guarded by Russian soldiers; if Ukrainian government wants to run an exercise it has to ask Russia for permission. And so on.
The deal was dead in the water before the meeting, and I suspect the Russians planned for it to fail. No country that is not already fully on the ropes could agree to any such "deal".
Just like the ultimatum given by Putin in 2021 to NATO, it was calculated to ensure that the war continues.
TacticalNuker@reddit
Ah yes aside from the manipulation in this comment agreeing to limit your armed forces, so that Russia can invade again truly seems like the best option for Ukraine.
Messier_-82@reddit
Why would Russia invade Ukraine if it agrees to all Russian demands?
TacticalNuker@reddit
Because that's what Russia has done in the past.
Messier_-82@reddit
Stupid argument. Europe attacked Russia many times in the past, does that mean they're gonna do it again?
ponchietto@reddit
Stupid counterargument.
Last time Eu did it Nazi where in charge, last time Russia did it there was the same president.
Messier_-82@reddit
The European mentality - refusing to take any responsibility for their imperialist actions. “We have a new president, so just forget what we did in the past”.
ponchietto@reddit
The Russian mentality - refusing to take any responsibility for thei CURRENT imperialistic actions.
The only difference between Germany 90 years ago and now is a 'president', indeed. /s
You should have written Chancellor, the president has a cerimonial role in Germany, and instead of president I should have written despot.
TacticalNuker@reddit
When on earth was the last time Europe attacked Russia (just please don't use the certain painter as an argument as he did not really represent Europeans)?
Also Russia has broken Budapest Memorandum, so any guarantees from them should be expected to not be respected.
Messier_-82@reddit
Ukrobots at it again haha. Are you seriously saying Germany is not part of Europe lol
Professional-Way1216@reddit
Well, it sort of worked for Finland, so it might work for Ukraine as well.
Chroma_primus@reddit
Yeah but it didn't work the last time russia invaded ukraine so.
Professional-Way1216@reddit
What didn't work ? There hasn't been signed any peace treaty yet,
Chroma_primus@reddit
The minsk agreement and the Budapest memorandum russia didn't keep their Word both times.
Professional-Way1216@reddit
Budapest memorandum was a non-binding political agreement, not a peace treaty. And Russia argues Ukraine broke it first in 2013 maidan protests/coup.
Minsk Agreements were not a peace treaty, their only topic was to solve the question of Donbas autonomy. Also both Merkel and Arestovych said that Ukraine was not planning to implement Minsk agreements and it's been done to buy time for Ukraine to rearm.
Chroma_primus@reddit
Merkel said that she wants alastig peace and that the agreement will hopefully soon ve replace by abonnieren lasting solution.
Also Maiden protest didn't involv russia why would it break the non in nonivasion agreement.
Also if the memorandum was non Bindung why even trust russia on anything when they say after the fact non binding and invade anyways.
Professional-Way1216@reddit
But Minsk agreements were not about peace, the Crimea was not a topic of agreements. It was only to resolve the Donbas autonomy issue.
Budapest memorandum is a non-binding political agreement, that a simple fact, it wasn't event ratified by Congress.
Chroma_primus@reddit
So Ukraine and kasachstan can get their nukes back or is this only for things that benefit the russian narative.
Professional-Way1216@reddit
Those were Soviet nukes stored on Ukrainian land and Ukraine didn't have control codes to use them. So those nukes were not really theirs.
Chroma_primus@reddit
You do realize they can just dismount the warheads and get them onto new rockets and ukraine was Part of the soviet union.
Professional-Way1216@reddit
How do you know it "just" needs to dismount the warheads ? Are you by chance an expert on Soviet nuclear weapons technology ? Do you know how warhead control mechanism works ?
Moscow was the sole authority over nuclear weapons control. Ukraine had no say in that.
Chroma_primus@reddit
I propose we give ukraine just the nukes anyway.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
Ukraine could have agreed to be turned into a more independent Belarus and this would have ended in 2022, there would have been no more civil wars, conflicts, etc. no so-called invasions.
that is the reality. the Kiev regime chose the Western path that will lead to nothing substantial for Ukrainian people except enriching the regime.
TacticalNuker@reddit
Bot?
Levelcheap@reddit
Bot.
MechaAristotle@reddit
I wonder why some states bordering Russia might be wary of them lol.
TimothyMimeslayer@reddit
We all saw what happened in Bucha, there can be no peace with orcs.
Federal_Thanks7596@reddit
Lmao, Trump bots are atleast funny unlike Russian ones or Hasbara.
NativeMasshole@reddit
Ah yes, the guy who blackmailed Ukraine for a political win is totally on Ukraine's side.
1DarkStarryNight@reddit (OP)
Senior White House officials believe some European leaders are publicly supporting President Trump's effort to end the war in Ukraine, while quietly trying to undo behind-the-scenes progress since the Alaska summit, Axios has learned.
Trump aides contend the blame should fall on European allies, not on Trump or Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.
White House officials are losing patience with European leaders, whom they claim are pushing Ukraine to hold out for unrealistic territorial concessions by Russia.
The Europeans are said to be pushing Zelensky to hold out for a "better deal" — a maximalist approach that has exacerbated the war, Trump's inner circle argues.
The U.S. officials believe British and French officials are being more constructive. But they complain that other major European countries want the U.S. to bear the full cost of the war, while putting no skin in the game themselves.
"Getting to a deal is an art of the possible," the top official said. "But some of the Europeans continue to operate in a fairy-tale land that ignores the fact it takes two to tango."
Trump was visibly frustrated about the situation during Tuesday's Cabinet meeting. "Everybody is posturing. It's all bullshit".
A senior White House official told Axios that Trump is seriously considering stepping back from the diplomatic efforts until one or both parties begin to show more flexibility. "We are going to sit back and watch. Let them fight it out for a while and see what happens," the official said
PatrollinTheMojave@reddit
Fucking rich that the White House is paraphasing Bismarck to say this. He'd be spinning in his grave
TheGuy839@reddit
It doesnt take to be a genius to reach that insight.
Tramp is stupid idiot who loves his ego -> Europe tells him what he wants to hear
Both Europe and Ukraine doesnt want war to end until there are border security in the deal - which wasnt the case.
Can you atleast use your brain, when your leadership clearly isnt?
kamazych@reddit
At the rate Russia is taking land by the end of next summer entirety of Donbas will be under its control. The shipments of anti-air systems and some medium range missiles will not do much regarding the situation on the frontlines. No wanting to hand over Donbas is just delaying the inevitable at the cost of thousands of lives.
Ukraine needs more tanks, IFVs, artillery systems, ammunition and most importantly manpower. These are all things that Europe cannot provide, only the US can.
BigFreakingZombie@reddit
Russia is advancing at rates that would make WW1 generals think the offensive is ''too slow'' and come with a horrendous ''butcher's bill'' as well. And finally Russia is feeling the hit from Ukraine hitting it where it hurts (aka it's fossil fuel industry as it's not hard to guess what happens to a ''gas station with nukes'' when there's no gas to sell) . At the current rate taking all of the Donbas would require half a decade and hundreds of thousands of Russian losses all this for a depopulated area that's so full of UXO that it's doubtful if any sort of commercial exploitation would really be viable.
Now don't get me wrong this doesn't mean that Ukraine is really doing that well. Even if the war ended right now and on the best possible terms for Zelensky the country is still looking at a huge surge in nationalism (with all the political effects within the country and outside of it that implies ) , a near total breakdown in gender relations and a demographic collapse as many refugees just won't return unless forced to. And that's on top of the economic issues of repairing the trillions in damage caused by the war AND the economic issues caused by eventual Euroatlantic integration....
Anyway point is that if Russia was on the verge of winning as they claim they are Putin wouldn't be basically trying to use Trump to persuade Ukraine to give up the Donbas without resistance.
Blarg_III@reddit
It's not sound reasoning.
BigFreakingZombie@reddit
I perfectly understand it's not linear and a sudden rapid breakthrough may well end up accelerating it greatly. The issue is that so far there's no indication whatsoever that such a breakthrough is imminent. Ukraine is taking a pounding but the line is holding and as long as western ammunition continues to flow they can continue to stop Russian offensives with massive losses.
greebdork@reddit
Your extrapolations regarding the course of the military conflict are childish to say the least. By your calculations, in 1941 it would take Russia minus eternity to get any German land. By the same calculations when Ukraine captured a part of the Kursk oblast they should've been parading in the Red Square by now.
But guess what, war isn't a linear graph.
ph4ge_@reddit
The offensive shows all the signs of an all or nothing approach and has mostly been stopped. Putin hasn't captured a single mayor city since the initial stages of the full scale invasion, so why would it succeed now. He is asking to get the Donbass as part of a peace deal exactly because he can't take it otherwise.
TacticalNuker@reddit
Also the winter is coming, so any major offences will not be possible.
imunfair@reddit
lol if you're really from Poland you should know better than that - only people from the US seriously claim that winter stops Russia from fighting. We have three years of conflict now and every year pundits claim that and every year Russia fights through the winter - only the mud season stops the fighting to any significant extent.
TacticalNuker@reddit
I never said they would stop fighting, I only said that there will be no major offensives like the summer offensive.
imunfair@reddit
I think you're listening to the UA MOD too much - for several years now Russia has been steadily and opportunistically attacking - saying there was a "major summer offensive" that will subside is completely misguided.
TacticalNuker@reddit
I'm not listening to UA MOD, it is just simply a fact that winter is beneficial for the defending side.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
The Russian plan is to bleed Ukraine until it has no choice but to accept some outrageous demands. However Russia is bleeding itself too, pretty badly. In the end it is a question who bleeds out first - and while Russia is somewhat likely to last longer, it is by no means a sure bet.
The war will either be ended by some kind of a "black swan" event (favouring one or the other side) or will continue for another few years until it just stutters out.
Messier_-82@reddit
You can't possibly believe that Ukraine can outlast Russian in an attritional war
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
Ukraine alone - absolutely not.
Ukraine with Europe at their back? Certainly a possibility.
Messier_-82@reddit
Aside from the obvious economic problems that Europe is facing right now, there's one crucial resource that Europe will never be able to provide to Ukraine - men. We already see a deteriorating situation in Donbas. I don't expect Ukraine to keep the current pace past 2026
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
>there's one crucial resource that Europe will never be able to provide to Ukraine - men
As long as Russia does not make a mistake like openly attacking Europe, this is mostly true.
However, the force generation on the Russian side also seems to shrink. There is a limited supply of men who are ready to die and kill for money, in any society - and Russia is subject to the same sort of demographic pressure as the rest of the developed world. The infinite supply of farmers's sons that was still mostpy present in Stalins time isn't there any more.
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
Especially given that they are fighting for their independence and not greed. They also have the home court advantage. Afghanistan wasn't stronger than UA.
ph4ge_@reddit
>You can't possibly believe that Ukraine can outlast Russian in an attritional war
The West has much more reserves than Russia. It was never about Ukraine maintaining, it was always about the Americans tiring out. For Russians and Ukrainians hardship is part of their normal live, for Americans any minor inconvience is to much to ask. Just look at how they lost their minds about masks during Covid.
TFBuffalo_OW@reddit
While I agree with you that Ukraines gambit isnt a winning one, its more complex than that. Russia is firm that they wont accept a deal that doesnt include Ukrainian Demilitarization and defacto reintegration of the state as a client to Russia, so right now the choice is to stall and hope international sentiment changes or complete defacto capitulation
kamazych@reddit
These requirements are a bluff. The main point that Russia is adamant about is controlling the entirety of Donbas. After a year of ceasefire neither side will be able to conduct offensive operation. Look how Ukraine struggled with Surovikin line or how Russia took catastrophic casualties to capture Bakhmut. Now imagine a mine field kilometers deep, with fortifications waiting on the other side, built by private contractors that didn’t have to fear an incoming drone or artillery round.
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
So many comments here saying don’t make a deal with Russia because they will attack again later. You really think that makes sense? Russia spends 3 years to just hold 4 regions? Losses hundreds of thousands of troops. Fires 100,000 drones, rockets, drones. Gets worst trade sanctions in history. You really think it was worth it? Hardly. And to go thru all of that again? No it would not be worth it for them.
mileslefttogo@reddit
The second any deal is made to stop the war Trump will drop all sanctions on Russia. He's come out in favor of rebuilding ties to Russia many times.
Russia will get everything it wants and Ukraine will be bled dry by financial commitments forced on it by the current US administration.
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Ukraine isnt forced into financial commitments from Trump. Zelensky already has put the country badly into debt during the Biden admin. In fact, it’s so bad it’s highly unlikely he will be able to accrue more debt in the future to continue fighting. That among many other reasons, is why this war is pretty much over short of nato countries sending in troops.
Plethorum@reddit
No, fuck russia. They should be treated like a pariah state for long after putin's death, to deter other imperialists from doing shit like that again.
russia needs a similar reckoning on their atrocities as nazi-germany had after the war. The people responsible need to be remembered shamefully as the genocidal, war criminals they are
ferroo0@reddit
please never pursue political career, even Lindsey Graham would be jealous of how hawkish you are. It's stupid to even compare Russia and Nazi Germany - nazi is anti-human ideology that came to power due to lunatics who decided to 'sort' people on who's capable of existing and who's existence should be cut off. And I don't see death camps being created on Ukrainian territory.
your "suggestion" is fucking pointless. World doesn't work how you would want it to be, it's not built on tribalism, and "fuck X country" will only lead to more and more confrontation and wars, where it's either "GLORY TO THE COUNTRY THAT I LIKE" or "DROP A NUKE ON THIS COUNTRY ASAP". You're a fucking clanker if you believe in such a binary view of the world.
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
What realistic suggestions do you have then?
Plethorum@reddit
Deep sanctions, more military spending in European countries and much more military support to Ukraine. Europe has been weak as shit and was caught with its pants down, it's time to pull them back up
ponchietto@reddit
Ehm, in February 2022 everybody was writing articles about how it was suicidal for Russia to invade Ukraine (and they were right).
Still they were wrong in assuming that Russia would not have attacked.
You are making the same mistake, Russia is not a rational entity.
First assuming Russian leaders have credible informations about the situation abroad and the situation in his army (when bringing bad news cost your head).
Second assuming that hundred of thousands of lives and material losses concern Putin (or the next dictator replacing him). The only thing that matters to him is to stay in power.
ferroo0@reddit
so... what was so suicidal for Russia? Europeans can barely agree on sanctions and on the amount of help that they should provide for Ukraine, what is there that can be considered as a "suicide?"
and you just assumed that you get killed for bringing news. Lol. Both Russians and Ukrainians see that battlefield nice and clear - both sides have access to satellites and to thousands of surveillance drones, or do you think that both sides fight with swords?
and now you assumed another thing, just for the fun of it.
CluelessExxpat@reddit
Who is everybody? A LOT of people were warning that Ukraine was Russia's red line and they would definitely invade if the West insisted on Ukraine's NATO accession.
Plethorum@reddit
"The West insisted on", you speak as if NATO forces countries to join, when they more than willingly apply to join to protect themselves from the brutal dictatotorial and imperialist regime in russia
CluelessExxpat@reddit
Go read last 150 years of history, geopolitics, reelpolitiks.
You sound disgustingly naive. There is no "willing".
Neithet US threatining a nuclear war during the Cuba crysis was surprising nor Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Its only surprising to people that live in an alternate universe where humanity was shooting flowers to each other.
kettal@reddit
Maybe I'm misremembering but I recall that the popular consensus was Ukraine would fall in short order.
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Yeah… you talk about February 2022, we are talking about everything that happened after that. It didnt go as planned and massive casualties for both sides.
seiryuu-abi@reddit
On the other hand you can say that it’s because Russia lost those things that they will attack again in the near future. Giving all that up just doesn’t make sense. Otherwise what was the war even for?
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
No you cannot say that. Both sides have paid a high price. There is no incentive for either to continue. Putin got Crimea, that’s all he really needed, along with the other surrounding regions that lead to it.
Plethorum@reddit
putin is an imperialist warmongerer that want all of Ukraine. Much like hitler didnt stop with sudetenland
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
He didn’t have to wage war for the Sudetenland, those people just gave it to him. Big difference.
Plethorum@reddit
Precisely. An enormous mistake, but a lesson to not appease people like hitler and putin
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
What!? No, Hitler took the sudentenland as no cost in a few months. Putin had had to wage a war 3 years for 15% of Ukraine. Heavy losses. Not even comparable. You speak nonsense.
Plethorum@reddit
For putin any land gains is worth the war because he dont value neither russian nor Ukrainian lives
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
No that’s not how war works. You need to have tangible assists to gain. You don’t lose 100,000 men 100,000 missles rockets drones just for “any land”
Plethorum@reddit
His country looks larger on russian maps and there are now more Ukrainian resources they can steal. This is all the gains he needs. Well worth it since he doesnt gove a shit about the soldiers that died for the evil empire, though russia will probably indoctrinate their children to revere the war criminals in charge
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
No it does not, it’s 15% of Ukraine. Barely noticeable, at all. Now you just aren’t making sense.
moderngamer327@reddit
Attacking Ukraine was never logical in the first place. You cannot determine the actions of countries purely on rationality
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Im not talking about whether it was logical or not to attack Ukraine. Im saying the cost has been so high that it wouldn’t make sense to do that again anytime soon.
moderngamer327@reddit
That’s the point. It didn’t make sense to do it in the first place so saying it doesn’t make sense do to it again is a predictor of nothing
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Yes it did. Putin needs Crimea so he has unfettered sea access.
moderngamer327@reddit
It already had Crimea before the full scale invasion in 2022
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Can’t have crimea if there’s no easy access. It’s pretty easy to see on a map.
moderngamer327@reddit
It seems pretty easy to access without the rest of Ukraine
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
No it’s not it’s a peninsula.
moderngamer327@reddit
It’s connected by the smallest amount of land. It is just as practical to access via water or bridges as it is by holding onto a tiny piece of barely connected land
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
No it is not. As clearly shown when Ukraine forces blew up the Crimea bridge.
moderngamer327@reddit
And yet Russia is still able to hold it easily
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Because they took over the regions that allow them easy access.
moderngamer327@reddit
What I mean is they have been holding onto it without issue since 2014. When I say easily I mean they have been able to hold it without losing territory or having massive control shifts in the region. Obviously on a macro level this entire thing has been a disaster for them
Happinessisawarmbunn@reddit
Stopping changing the goal posts.
Ma_Bowls@reddit
There have been 4 presidential administrations since this war started in 2014, and all of them have tried to give Ukraine less than the bare minimum amount of support that it needs. If Joe Biden had given them what they needed in 2022, the war would be over already and Trump wouldn't have an opportunity to stab them in the back.
BenDover42@reddit
That’s not really true that it would be over. But the Biden administration especially played on emotions acting like they cared when their only policy was to extend the war as long as possible and make Russia pay. They don’t care about Ukrainians and never did.
NotStompy@reddit
The genuinely moronic thing about Biden's approach is that I genuinely think they were pussyfooting so much because they were actually trying to avoid provoking some kind of a nuclear escalation or something, which is just... lol. Putin doesn't let his own feces stay anywhere, he has his team bring it with them and dispose of it in private because he's afraid someone will sequence his DNA and assassinate him.
A man that paranoid pressing the big red button and ushering in his own demise, with 100% certainty? Yeah... sure haha
Biden fucked that aspect up, big time. At least they weren't as bad as Trump, I guess...
Blarg_III@reddit
According to Liz Truss (not a particularly reliable source), she was spending her last days in office fully expecting Putin to use a nuclear weapon.
Universal_Anomaly@reddit
The USA's current deal is generous enough that Russia could declare victory and then in a couple of years try to seize what's left of Ukraine.
They're complaining that the EU isn't helping them push Ukraine into capitulation, most likely to paint the EU/Ukraine as being no better or even worse than Russia.
The leadership of both Russia and the USA are now strongly pro-authoritarianism, and now they wish to see the same ideology take control in the EU.
Potaeto_Object@reddit
Everyone always says Russia would just invade again if we got peace now, but that makes absolutely no sense. First of all, Zelensky has been demanding an immediate ceasefire for months, even after both Trump and Putin said that wasn’t on the table. Why would Ukraine be demanding something if it isn’t advantageous for themselves, as you suggest?
The reason is because a peace now would be more advantageous for Ukraine than for Russia. Ukraine is weak now. Russia is strong now. Why would Russia agree to a temporary peace if that time is just going to be used to make Ukraine stronger? Why not just keep going while the balance of power is so lopsided in Russia’s favor?
This is why Russia wants the “root causes” of the conflict addressed and a final settlement achieved. This is why Russia has opposed an unconditional ceasefire from the very beginning. Any temporary peace benefits Ukraine more than Russia, and is also why it is in Russia’s interests for the fighting to end permanently not temporarily.
NotStompy@reddit
Why would Ukraine do it? Because they are actually okay with a ceasefire. They know Russia is not, as has been repeatedly proven, which is Zelensky's way of saying "Hey so Trump/Vance, remember when you both said Putin wants peace? Yeah... he doesn't, we all know that, but let's prove it to the world...".
It's his way of applying pressure to both Trump and Putin. It's not a complicated equation.
Why am I even writing this, though? You mention Russia's mention of "Root causes" which I'm guessing means you believe in some variety of what Russia is selling you. The same Russia, led by Putin, who with a straight face wrote a huge essay in 2021 very much so making the case that "Ukraine? Ah... they're just a little confused, we're all Russians! It's not a really a country, they're just a little lost, we'll help them out, they can be part of Novorossiya!".
Plethorum@reddit
Root causes? You mean their unchecked imperialist aggression and their desire to kill, rape and torture Ukrainian civilians?
Papa-pumpking@reddit
Russia is not strong.They lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers and thousands of tanks and vehicles.They are scraping their own stock to get hold of new tanks and havent managed to gain a single city in the summer offensive.Vetting a peace deal that gets Ukraine in a disadvantage is plain moronic.
Cost_Additional@reddit
What does victory look like?
alecsgz@reddit
Is something I personally could negotiate. Seriously what has USA negotiated?
6 year olds could negotiate the same exact deal as Trump did
neoqueto@reddit
I wouldn't say capitulation but cession of whatever Russia demands. Trump still wants to paint himself as the savior of Ukraine.
alecsgz@reddit
Is something I personally could negotiate. Seriously what has USA negotiated?
6 year olds could negotiate the same exact deal as Trump did
Plethorum@reddit
Dude, you are so far down putin's asshole if you think countries like Ukraine, Sweden, Finland etc didnt want to join NATO willingly. They realized that they need security guarantees because the empire to the east is being run by a mad, warmongering psychopath. By invading Ukraine, putin proved all of these countries correct, which is why Finland and Sweden finally joined the defensive alliance
GodZ_n_KingZ@reddit
The EU is a circus and the world is laughing at it. The US, Russia and China are sick of their shit, nobody is taking them seriously anymore.
Plethorum@reddit
On Ukraine, the EU is at least on the right side. putin will be compared to hitler for generations to come
PartySr@reddit
Trump:
Two weeks later
Trump is winning and Russia sure feel sorry for themselves..
Private_HughMan@reddit
When he cut Russia's "deadline" from 50 days down to 10, I was starting to think maybe he was actually going to harden his stance on Russia. But the dude folded faster than Superman on laundry day.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
Dude is rotating faster than a weathervane in a tornado. In a week he will be pro-Ukrainian again. And a week later, again pro-Russian.
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
He'll never genuinely be pro-Ukraine, never was.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
He is not genuinely pro-anything or anyone except pro-his oversized ego.
ilimlidevrimci@reddit
Yeah but he sure does have a soft spot for putin.
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
He has never met a dictator he doesn't like.
MechaAristotle@reddit
He was waxing about meeting Kim-jong Un again only recently right?
Abject-Investment-42@reddit
Again? They had such a bromance last time
BigFreakingZombie@reddit
TACO Trump strikes again.
BurstYourBubbles@reddit
Thiswholepoerationwasyouridea.jpg
Funny that it was the Americans that had been most enthusiastic aboout confrontation whereas EU states had dragged their feet. It seems that some in Europe have lost grasped of the intitial logic that encouraged confrontation in the first place
saracenraider@reddit
This just goes to show the stupidity within the White House (not the pentagon, as although the headline mentions the Pentagon, everything in the article itself references the White House).
Trump is desperate for a deal of any shape or size, just to ‘end the war’ and get his beloved Nobel peace prize. He has little understanding (or more likely care) for the finer details. He keeps hearing the European leaders express a desire for a deal albeit only on certain conditions (eg security guarantees and not giving up the Donbas fortress belt) but all Trump hears is ‘we want a deal’. So then he throws a tantrum when a deal doesn’t materialise as he has no patience for all the finer details that have to be negotiated. To say it’s all behind the scenes is absurd, the European position is very clear, and they made it clear to Trump a few weeks ago in the White House.
And this is all before we bring the Russians into the mix, with their maximalist negotiating position that even the White House doesn’t seem to understand (thanks, Steve Whitkoff)…
If Trump wants an end to the war he needs to realise this isn’t a business deal or a minor border skirmish like the other peace deals he supposedly single handedly achieved but an incredibly complex situation that will require hugely skilled negotiations due to the disparity in negotiating positions, not a toddler throwing tantrums.
AutoModerator@reddit
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.